Inactive

?

Nokia (Strategic Developer)

X

?

CA Inc. (Strategic Consumer)

X

?

brox IT-Solutions GmbH (Strategic Developer)

X

Note: "Inactive" refers to Strategic Members we have not heard from in a year or so, and have been unable to convince to participate. Those members can become active again at any time. Contact David Williams if questions.

Galileo

Any SR2 issues? We will try RC1 as a rollup-warmup. RC2 will be true "release candidate".

Helios

John asks, What do we call this thing we do? "simultaneous release", "coordinated release", "annual release", "release train"?

And ... who releases it? "The Eclipse Foundation", "The Eclipse Community", "The Eclipse Projects"?

Resolved: best to use "Simultaneous Release" and "The Eclipse Foundation". (There was discussion that maybe "the PLanning Council" (but, no), and concerns that "the Community" was too inclusive, and "The Eclipse Projects", while correct :), is included as part of "The Eclipse Foundation".

egit and linux-distros have "expressed intent" but since not in build, require an exception.

Wayne to follow up with these projects and request exception if appropriate. (He note 'egit' in particular was important to the "business" of Eclipse).

Modeling ... where to start? :)

What is EEF? They (Cedric?!) just today are adding themselves to build. Appears a clear case where an exception is required first?

Thanks to Cedric for reading agenda ahead of time and knowing he needs an exception. Him and Ed will discuss sending "formal" request to planning council list. Ed acknowledge projects such as GMF "are hard to contact" due to changes in companies and individuals status ... but, he will work on and resolve, since GMF is so important.

How is the "one row == one release" rule looking?

Ed agreed to fix up his part of table ... as well as make sure the subprojects do "roll up" with in the primary rows.

Structure of Common Discovery Site

Tracking progress and compliance

Long Term

What needs to be done for e4?

Notes: The fundamental question is if it will be a requirement, in 2011, that to be part of the Simultaneious Release, such as "Projects must build on and fit in with e4 (even if not exploit it)". Our intuition is this would be a nice requirement ... but, its unclear how hard this is and if it is feasible. And ... the point is, we should begin that investigation before Helios and before e4 0.9 (so, we'd know early if feasible or if fundamental prohibitive issues.

Some things, like "building on e4" is not posible right now, but should be in March or April.

Other things, like running API cleanliness tests, can be started soon. API cleanliness is critical to have an easy transition to e4. Chris will put that test/measurement in place.

David to add some small infrastructure to kick off junit tests, so Chris can add a plugin to do the tests.

Other business

Need to clarify "capabilities" requirement, even remove them from the M5 build. After note to cross-project list (David to send).